Why Did So Many Jews Become Communists?

the west has been faced with two semitic threats. actually three if we include christianity. jesus christ was a jew, or a semite. the religion that he founded came to the official religion of almost all of europe, wiping out all the indigenous religions, myths, and gods of the europeans. but in time, europe and christianity become synonymous. europe became thorougly christian. also, as christianity was a universalist moral creed without stress on culture, europeans were able to preserve or revive much that was distinctly european in conjunction with christianity.

but, marxism and islam have a different history in europe. both have challenged the christian-eurpean order, but neither have been accepted by the majority of europeans--except in russia--as "our" culture. they were seen as hostile, alien, subversive, dangerous, inhuman, etc.
during the cold war, eastern/central europe was under communist rule but the majority of the people under soviet occupation didn't embrace communist identity; they more or less correctly regarded communism as a leftwing jewish & russian imperialism. the majority of people during the cold war wanted to be delivered from communism--as most greeks during the ottoman rule wanted to be liberated from the turks. similarly, russians never accepted mongols as legitimate rulers of russia.

both islam and marxism were essentially 'semitic' challenges to the west(mongols were the asiatic challenge to the west). no people wanted to be ruled or dominated by others, but when french or the dutch were under german rule, it was still a case of europeans ruling over europeans. it was bad europeans ruling over other europeans, but it was an european affair.
islam, on the other hand, was seen as an alien, foreign, non-european, and anti-european force in the world. and despite the secular universalism of marxism/communism, many in europe associated it with the jews, and they were not entirely wrong in this.

in some ways, the dangers faced by the west from islamic radicals is similar to those faced by the west under the assault from radical jews.
to be sure, there are key differences.
radical jews were often anti-jewish(religiously and culturally) and assimilated into the mainstream community. karl marx regarded himself more as a german than as a jew. lenin didn't know that he was 1/4 jewish, and trotsky saw himself as a world revolutionary, not a jewish revolutionary. yet, we can argue that jewish mentality was alive and well in all three men despite their conscious beliefs.
they didn't see themselves as jews nor as fighting for jewish interests. soviet jews were more likely to see themselves as russian revolutionaries than as jewish revolutionaries. one can find certain similarities in the structural mentalities of hebraism and marxism, but the idea among radical jews was that they were no longer jews but members of the brotherhood of man or some such.
in contrast, muslims are very much aware of their muslim-ness and fighting for islamic interests, power, and priorities. if marxism was a case of radical assimilationism--with jews assimilating totally into the nation and all people of the nation assimiliating into communism--, islam is about radical anti-assimilation-ism. radical muslims do not want to become part of european culture, christian or secular. to be sure, there is an element of reverse-assimilationism in radical islam; even as muslims refuse to join the european cultural community, some muslims are eager to convert europeans toward islam; in this regard, radical islam has something in common with marxism. marxism was both assimilationist and reverse-assimilationist--jews melting into the national or international community and majority populations forced to melt into communist ideology and system.

another key difference between the challenge of radical jewism and radical islam is the cultural and political climate of europe. during the late 19th and first half of the 20th century, many people in europe were comfortable with imperialism and racial consciousness. and it was widely fashionable to speak ill of jews as finance capitalists, bloodsuckers, or commie subversives. european nations were nationalistic, confident, strong, arrogant, and cocksure of their destiny and values. WWI dampended much of this, but much of the old passions and prejudices survived. even after the shock of WWII, many supported the idea of 'white man's burden', white man's superiority, western supremacy, jewish wickedness, and so on. it was really with the devastation of WWII which really changed european thinking. the reasons were obvious. (1). hitler represented white supremacism and racial imperialism at their extremes and they were not pretty. on one level, hitler was seen as the enemy of european civilization but on another, he was seen as the logical product of european imperialism and racism. so, europeans felt not just shame over the dead jews but imperialism and racism all over the world against africans, arabs, asians, etc. after hitler, it was harder to maintain the notion of white man's civilizating role in the world.
(2). european nations were weakened and lost their empires. as europeans now needed to deal with the world on a more equal footing, they had to be more diplomatic and emphasize the equality of all men. this applied not just to international diplomacy but to domestic affairs. immigrant workers, for example, had to be treated with respect and tolerance.
(3). the people who were victimized terribly in WWII were the jews, a very talented and smart people. in time, they would become the most powerful group in the most powerful nation on earth. jewish intellectuals would also continue to be important in the USSR. and even as the jewish population in europe had been greatly diminished, many jews would play very prominent roles in the brain centers of europe. as jews had been victimized by white racism, they used all their power and might to reduce or castrate white power or racial consciousness. in time, most white people were riddled with guilt, pussified, and ever-so-cautious-to-make-any-'racist'-remark. so, europeans, who had been so cocky, arrogant, confident, and proud became, in time, guilt-ridden, liberalish, goo goo, wimpy, tail-between-the-legs, and such.
so, the muslims didn't face the kind of animosity faced by jews in the late 19th and early 20th century. to be sure, there was some degree of discrimination and many tensions between immigrants and local native toughs. but, respectable and official society frowned upon and/or condemned all signs of 'racism'. the powers-that-be were on the side of the muslim immigrants. this has been the case in france, UK, denmark, belgium, holland, sweden, germany, etc.
so, one could argue that muslims, unlike jews, were 'spoiled' by european nations. they were allowed many liberties and privileges. they were not constantly criticized, condemned, and mocked like jews had been during the late 19th century. and, europeans were very sensitive toward muslims feelings and sentiments.
then, one must ask why did muslims become as hostile and dangerous as leftwing jews?

it's often been said that the reason why so many jews turned hostile and vicious is because the majority goyim were hostile and vicious. kicked about here and there, beaten up, discriminated against, and so on, jews finally had enough and chose a radical course to create a just society where people wouldn't treat one another like shi*. according to this narrative, jews learned that making money wasn't enough. no matter how much money or power a jew gained, he would always be seen as a jew. only solution for jews in the long run was communism which would do away with all national and religious affiliations or consciousness; there would only be humanity. also, class hierarchy must also go cuz such would lead to certain groups exploiting others and lead to resentment. for marx, a rich jew was no more safe than a poor jew. the resentful goyim would yell, 'hey look, a rich jew! let's kick his ass!'
there is some truth to this explanation as to why jews turned radical. but, there are other reasons. jewish personality at the biological level is wiley, abrasive, violent, aggressive, restless, irreverent, and disrespectful. not all jews are like this but enough are to make for a rather rage-filled and righteous community. alan dershawitz was born to be an asshole. he's not a communist nor necessarily a radical but he thrives on confrontation. he likes to make other people his bitch. he loves to show off his wit and intelligence. he is to law what ron jeremy is to porn. he likes to dickslap us.

also, jews are very proud people and the idea of simply melting in dimwit goyim society pathetic and insulting to many jews. if jews were to melt in with the goyim, it had to be on jewish terms. jews had to cook up the theory which would bring mankind together.
indeed, one wonders why so many american jews have been so vile and hateful toward the US. we can understand jewish hatred of russia and poland, but why such hatred for the US which was so nice to the jews? so, we must conclude that jewish or semitic personality played a big role in jewish relation to goy kind. jews struck at goyim cuz goyim were nasty, but goyim also struck at jews cuz jews were nasty. cuz jews were smaller in number, they got the worst of it thru history--except early yrs of communism when radical jews really had russia in the palms of their hands--and came to be seen as victims; but if jews had been in the majority they would have been no less nasty to dimwit goyim; perhaps more so.

muslims who immigrated to europe faced much less or no blatant discrimination, hostility, or such from the majority population. if such feelings existed, they were suppressed by the major political, cultural, and social institutions. most such institutions were run by liberal or leftwing bureaucrats. so, it's puzzling as to why so many muslims are so hateful toward europe.
if radical jews became hateful because of goy hostility, it seems as though radical muslims became hateful because of european generosity.
one may hate the enemy's power but despise the enemy's weakness even more.
both jews and muslims are a proud people. jews traditionally believed that they were the chosen people of the one and only god. so, they hated the fact that christians--who usurped the jewish religion--would call jews 'christ killers' and 'leeches'. and jews hated the power of the lowlife goyim.
muslims are also a proud people. they believe that muhammad was the last and final prophet; his truth is THE truth. and, muslims have traditionally seen christians/europeans as their main enemies or rivals. but, his hatred of christians/europeans was also mixed with admiration, respect, and awe. islam reveres militaristic power, and eurpean imperialism was truly badass. but, when muslims arrived in the europe of postwar era, they found alot of europeans who were wimpy, self-loathing, flaky, decadent, frivolous, spoiled, childish, etc. muslims no longer saw europeans and the west as forces to fear(and respect) but something to despise and look down upon. but, what was frustrating was that this decadent, prideless, self-loathing west still remained far richer, far more powerful, and far more influential than the proud and heart-thumping nations of islam and arabia. how could this be? something was terribly wrong.
it was also humiliating to be whupped by israeli jews in the wars of 1948 and 1967--indeed, muslims had been used to seeing jews as a bunch of wimpass accountants or merchants. but, at the very least, the jews of israel were militarist, proud, nationalistic, and such; so, israeli-jweish power made sense; jews were powerful because they were proud and confident.
but, how could the west continue to be so strong and mighty when so much of it looked mindless, pussy, drugged out, gay-ish, metro-sexualish, and feminized? so, the muslim mind went schizo. west looked weak but was still strong. muslim nations looked strong but were weak. for all of nasser and hussein's saber rattling, they were leaders of third rate powers.
in the 60s to the 80s, there was the idea that muslim nations would become rich, strong, and such under the rule of secular or revolutionary leadership. but, when guys like nasser, ben bella, assad, shah of iran, hussein, and others all failed to accomplish this, there was a growing sense that the only way muslim nations can stand up in the world is by adhering more closely to islam. the secular leaders has argued that islamism--at least as a national ideology--were archaic and held their nations back. but, when they failed to key wars or build genuinely powerful nations that could stand up to israel or to the west, there was a revival of islamism.
this is why the nuke is so important to iran. when the muslims came to power in iran and set up a theocracy, they promised an iran that would be richer, more powerful, and etc. but, iran remained backward. militarily, it lost to iraq in a bloody war. and so, more and more iranians have grown disgruntled with the claims of islamicism. so, the iranian leadership need something big and powerful to demonstrate to their people that islamicism does indeed lead to mighty powerfulness. and the short cut is to have the bomb. it's the equivalent to a poor, uneducated, and weak man proving his manhood by unzipping fly and saying 'at least i got a big dick'.
iran wants a big dick if nothing else. the big dick will justify islamic rule.
of course, the lure of the bomb-as-short-cut-to-legitimizing-tyranny(the big dick strategy) has been employed by stalin, mao, hindus, pakis, and north korea. notice that when israel attained the bomb, it kept it a secret. israel was a success story in terms of social, economic, and political power; israelis had plenty to be proud of even without the bomb. the bomb was a just-in-case weapon. but, for failed states, the bomb is the only thing they can hold up to justify the current rule.
US was an economic and social success, and so didn't need to have endless military parades.
USSR was an economic and social basketcase and had to rely extensively on military parades with giant big dick missiles. it was like saying, 'we may not be as rich as you guys but our dicks are bigger'.

anyway, back to the question as to why so many jews became communists.
was it partly because judaism isn't conversionary? suppose judaism had been conversionary? jews could have remained jews and dreamt of world power by converting others to judaism. indeed, christians and muslims don't have to adopt an ideology such as communism in order to gain great power in the world. their goals are to convert other peoples to their faiths. jews could never gain world power way cuz judaism is only for jews. so, for jews to play the kind of role that christians and muslims played, they needed a conversionary faith. indeed, one could argue that christianity was the first of its kind. jesus was a jew who wanted to turn everyone into a jew--reformulated to be sure. but, most jews opted out of this. most denounced jesus and colluded with the romans to have him killed. in time, it was the pagans who adopted christianity, and so a jewish-based religion came to oppress jews for millenia. this rejection of conversionary universalism haunted the jews all throughout history. as long as jews were content to stick together and maintain their jewishness, it didn't matter if they had power over others. what jews wanted was to be left alone, to be free from persecution. they wanted power over their own lives and community, not power in the whole world. yet, this was impossible cuz jews didn't have a homeland of their own and were forced to live amongst other people. and, with the coming of modern assimilationism of the 19th century, jews couldn't simply think or be jewish. they had to redefine their belief systems so as to merge with the rest of society. there was basically two forms of assimilation--religious, by which a jew turned christian, or secular, whereby a jew entered a profession in goy society and adopted modernity. in both cases, jews had to become part of goy-defined society. jews may have excelled at this--indeed become better christian theologians or better doctors/professors/scientists--but, jews had to play by goy rules and serve the goy worldview. so, neither assimilationism into christianity nor into secularism was satisfying to many jews.

in some ways, commuism was a secular ideology. but, as a form of radicalism, it was too dogmatic and 'religious' to be bunched together with, say, becoming a doctor or accountant in a modern cosmopolitan and individualist society. it was an iron faith. one had to convert to it totally as one would convert to islam or christianity. a muslim or christian believes in only one god and that jesus is the messiah or muhammad is the greatest/final prophet. similarly, marxism isn't the kind of secualrism that allows open minds and discourse. there is only one correct theory and one must believe it or else. so, communism was a neo-religion. and it was appealing to jews cuz it finally gave them the kind of power held by christians and muslims.
a jew as a jew was always at a disadvantage vis-a-vis christians and muslims who, thru conversion, always vastly outnumbered the jews.
a jew as a jew, no matter how radical or aggressive, cannot win the world. at best, he can win a place of his own--like israel. indeed, zionism, for all its aggressiveness, was an inward looking movement for a little bitty place for jews.
in contrast, when a muslim becomes radical and aggressive, he has world conquest on his mind. he knows that he can spread the faith thru jihad, war, terrorism, rallies, speeches, pamphlets, internet, etc.
christians have the same kind of advantage with their faith.
so, neither a muslim nor a christian needs communism to dream of taking over the world.
the only way jews can dream of world power is to adopt something like communism. such ideology would be invented by a radical jew, shaped and led by mostly jewish intellectuals and radicals. and, other people could be converted to it.

now, suppose judaism had been conversionary. would jews have entered communism in such great numbers? of course, this question is rather silly. had jews been conversionary, jews as we know of them would have become extinct long time ago. suppose when jesus preached a new kind of judaism, most jews jumped on the bandwagon. then, jews might have led that movement for quite a long time. but, with more and more goyim converting to this universal judaism, there would have been no traditional judaism or jewish identity left.
still, suppose in the early 19th century, judaism changed into a universal religion and stressed converting non-jews toward judaism. would the appeal of communism have been as strong for many jews? did many jews reject judaism mainly because it was reactionary/superstitious or because it was limited in gaining power in the world?
similarly, suppose islam hadn't been conversionary but only applied to a single tribe in the middle east. in the modern world, would many muslims have rejected it and embraced a radical secular ideology?

indeed, we can see the problems of judaism when we examine nazism. nazis, like the jews, felt special and unique. yet, they also wanted world power.
jews had traditionally been content to be unique and left alone in their own world. christians had been universalist/embracing and out to conquer/convert(conquert?) the world. there was a consistency in the world outlooks of both jews and christians. jews said leave us alone and we'll be content among ourselves. and christians said we'll spread our word and power because all people are god's children. nazis said we are special and unique but we should rule over other people. the problem of the nazis illustrates that jews could not conquer the world as jews. if jews had strived for world power as jews, they would have ended up like the nazis. yet, if jews had only remained jews, they would have been mired in backwardness and in the old way. as for assimilation, it was humiliating for a proud people--as it is for many muslims who feel superior to europeans--, and there was also bad faith among the goyim as even assimilated jews often faced discrimination--not least because jews were much more successful in many fields than their christian counterparts.
then, it's understandable why communism was appealing for many jews. it had an element of assimilationism in that jews and goyim would come together. but, the rule of this unity would be formulated by radical jews. jews wouldn't melt into the goy order but create a new order into which goyim would be converted or forced to join. so, it was both assimilationist and conquering--humanity would come together according to the rules set by radical jews. but, communism also retained elements of judaism and was appealing to jews for that reason. traditional jews were into hair splitting talmudic scholarship, and communism was a very intellectual ideology where intellectuals would rule and set the agenda. since the jews were the most intellectualish of peoples, they were bound to dominate this new ideology. communist jews violently rejected and repressed judaism, but many of their jewish habits carried on in the practice of marxist intellectualism.

the old testament tells of man's fall and ejection from the garden. jews have never accepted the world or humanity as it is. rather, jews have been more interested in what the world should be or was before the fall or what man should be than is. jews have been obsessed with abstract principles and ideals than with man as man or world as world.
and, this worldview extended thru communism. capitalism accepts human nature for what it is and believes in a live-and-let-live philosophy of letting people trade freely and letting the chips fall where they may. this was too random, too 'pagan', too compromised, too filthy for many jews. even as many jews had worked in finance, trade, and such, the intellectual aspect of the jewish community was disdainful of the filthyness of the world. all throughout the bible, there is a conflict in the jewish community between those who revel in the world and those who speak of a higher truth. and the bible were written by priests and prophets, not be jewish merchants. as jews got bashed here and there over and over, jews came to believe that earthly riches were temporary while god's truth was for all time. so, even rich and materialistic jews had great respect for rabbis and such.
and, this extended to modern times. many jews were happy to make money and gain material rewards. but, the jews who really captured the imagination were the communist jews. they spoke of the world not as it is but as it should be. and, the ONLY way the world could be as it should be is thru goodness triumphing over evil, not by a live-and-let-live attitude. milton friedman may be right but he offers no promise other than freedom of competition and choice. many jews wanted more. they wanted a new world, an end to history, a messianic paradise. and such could only be gained thru purity--if not of religion, than of ideology.
indeed, this probably explains why so many rich materialistic jews defer to leftist jews in the US. many jewish millionaires and billionaires fund the thinkthanks, organizations, magazines, institutions, and such dominated by leftwing jews who are hostile to capitalism. steven soderbergh has made tens or 100s of millions in hollywood but is making a movie on che guevara. why? deep inside, most jews still feel that the world is filthy. they understand that capitalism is the most productive and efficient of systems, but they also it as fundamentally savage, ugly, exploitative, trashy, etc. jews, being so intellectualish, feel that the world should conform to higher ideas rather have ideas conform to lower realities.

then, we may ask why don't jews balance their capitalism with their jewish faith?
make money outdoors and maintain faith indoors in the bosom of family and temple?
problem with this for modern jews is that judaism doesn't spiritually connect them with rest of humanity. so, marxism is still more appealing to many jews.
also, the scientism among jews makes it difficult for jews to take religions seriously. for most jews, jewishness is ethnic, not religious. being a jew may be spiritual in the sense that jews suffered so much thru history but not spiritual in the sense that jews are the children of god who doesn't even exist.